What strikes me as interesting is that skips seem to be less extreme than other stats. Please let me explain, because skips is not the right word.

This can be applied to various bets. Let's see some examples.Take even chances.The difference between B and R or H and L in absolute numbers can be quite high at times. Also the type of streaks can vary very much seeing 20 spins with only two color changes (chops) or many changes (chops).

What I find to be less volatile than other stats is the difference between the 50% event RR and RB. Note that a RB event can be followed by many B (RBBBBBBBBB) or few B, but it is still a RB event. The RR event is finished after the second hit and another event will start with the second hit now as first hit. Next time R hits a new RR or RB event will start. We are basically looking for sequences with two R. These can be two consecutive RR or a R at the start and a R at the end with as many B in between. These events have a bit more steady rate of appearance than other simple chances.

I first discovered this not by looking at even chances but at other bets. I tend to use the transformation (mentioned by Bayes and Sheridan) and transform all kinds of bets into 50% even chances.

An example. Let's take the 4 numbers bet. The equivalent 50% even bet is one corner hit in 6 spins. Whenever we have a corner hit we record it as R and if hits within 6 spins we have a RR sequence. If the corner does not hit within 6 spins, no matter if it is after 10 or 20 spins, we have a RB event. Always after a hit we have a new sequence that can develop into a RR or RB type of event.

My point is that in all the extremities I have witnessed, these types of evens show a considerable consistency. While can see often 8 reds after another you can not see as often 8 RR or RB "events" after another, though both have a 50% chance.

Furthermore the skip events have an added benefit. Although typically a "losing" RB is the same with any other RB event, the length of the RB event (say having 9 losses or 19 losses of the corner) can offer valuable side information that can help us identify a possible correction. For example after 3 20-spin long RB events, our corner has only appeared 3 times in 60 spins, while after 3 10-spin long RB events out corner has hit 3 times in 30 spins. This is something that can be taken into consideration in our betting strategy.

I've noticed something like this too with red/black. May be a little different from what you're saying Kav, but same concept. Consider the following sequence of red/blacks:

RRBBRRRBRBBRBRRBRB

There are 6 series of reds. The odds of getting RR or RB are both 50%. Maybe after 2 RR in a row, bet the opposite next time on the first bet. Two RBs or two RRs in a row will be trigger to bet the opposite next time.

RRBBRRRBR (BET BLACKNEXT)B - win

RBBRBR (2 RBs in a row, bet red next spin)B (lose - don't bet again yet)BBR (there are now 3 RBs in a row, so bet red again)

For something called personal permanence I prefer to be into the game at all times with a base bet. So after a loss one can just increase the bet of the next attacks. Also like I said it IS important if you loss was a RBBR or a RBBBBBBBBR . Maybe a short losing sequence should count as 1 point and a long as 2 points. And then based on the points you can adjust your bet.

I have seen even more balanced results when using it with other bets than simple chances. Say we take the double-street bet (line). It has a 50% chance of appearing within 4 spins. When it hits within 4 spins we record a W and if it goes beyond 4 spins without a hit we record a L. We bet the first 4 spins after a hit with increased bet and otherwise continue with our base bet.

It is possible to have LLWLLLLWLLWWL sequence. But because some of the L sequences will be pretty long with the street sleeping for quite some time, it is more rare to have a WWLLLLLLLLLL sequence that is quite common in simple chances.

Although I'm always in the game with a base bet, as I see it, long losing sequences are a good thing. If my street disappears for 20 spins then hits once and then disappears for another 20 spins, I may have lost 40 + 4x3=52 units if I bet after a hit 4 units for the next 4 spins. The good news is that though the expected average is 1 hit in ~6 spins I only have 1 hit in 40 spins. This should somehow correct by producing more hits within the first 4 spins after a hit. So after the next hit I will bet 5 units for 4 spins. And if I still don't get an early hit, next time I can bet 6 units for 4 spins etc. Hope you get the idea.

I'm confirming that the deviations between series vs chops (intermittences) are milder than those of the EC pairs (black/red,even/odd,low/high).

Try to imagine results as an an acrobat walking on a tensed rope, in one hand holds a bucket of EC pairs, while on the other a bucket with series and chops, trying to keep the balance in all situations is not an easy thing...

Personal permanence is an absurd idea according my perspective and let me explain you why I believe so;When you start a new session you never know what happened before you arrive there, also you never know what happens after you finish your session and leave.By transferring old outcomes to new sessions and/or other casinos would not give you any insight about what's coming next.The only ones who have the complete picture are the casinos which monitor tables 24/7.But even if you had an insider would not be sufficient because the ''eye in the sky'' is not always the same person.

I apologise because I'm thinking out loud instead of telling you something you'd like to listen.

Personal permanence is based on probabilities:A random combination of random sequences is probabilistic-aly equal to a long random sequence.One's play, no matter where or when, can be combined to form a long random sequence (like the one produced if all the spins where on the same wheel). I apologize, but the concept of Personal permanence is mathematically sound. But this is another topic.

Sequences are funny thing to calculate. Here are reasons: Whatever was on previous spin (b or r) has almost no affect on next spin result color. - it will show patterns, but these are unpredictable ( so unusable). We never know when they start and when will finish. - there is a " paradox" in probability due to " independance of results from each other. While previous result probability is always 100%, next spin result expectation is 18/ 37( for color). Probably there is a way to calculate exact probability of a color on next spin, but to be near reality, need to account probability of every number in current spin ( with bias, and inperfections. ..ets) , wich is not easy and do not bring real money either. It's because tiny advantage we may get is deluted by 18 numbers ( color). In general, mathematically game itself ( perfect wheel model) is unbeatable. It's made to be so by unfair payments adopted in the game practice. Other thing about sequences, when we look what ball does. We may pin point real math limits in hits distrebution. So this thing of looking sequences may become profitable.... but it's all other story.

There is a way to measuring when a state start and end - the bias is very clear when some one can distinct the three states from the chaotic state. Some one can use the Z-Score to measuring and chart the strength behind the bias.

They come as small, medium and large imbalance states where they all are connected with each other.So if you have the expectation that the next state will have a bias, then you can predict the future within three attempts.

So the conclusion is that if you master the EC and know how to explore the right way to tackle EC you can both tell when they start and end and predict the future.But the hunch and expectation is based upon that there is present imbalance.

To get a better understanding some one can divide the permanence into sections for each bias state.Then you can see two things to emerge.So the bias state will have at least one repeat of two present events/outcomes and for that reason you know what will happen in the future - as the minimum section is three events and has at least one repeat among two present events/outcomes.

True that everything lose to something.But i put my money on does events that can strike for 20 to 30% of a hole baccarat shoe.That is 20 to 30 events going as direct winnings or break even results.

LWWWLWLWLWWLWWWWWLWWLWLWLWLWLW

It is the best of the best.Each state end with two loses and each non bias state results with three loses.No one can do better and that with any combination.

I played systems based on events or "groups" for a long time.series are for sure more balanced then single events. I looked at thousands of data and saw it.the longer the serie, because it takes more "space" then single events bring more prediction.in other words if you see a serie ; RRR-BBBB-RRRRR-BBB-RRRRRR, you can make a pretty good bet and bet that you will have a group or serie of RR, OR BB. showing up very soon. the larger groups contribute to the probabilities that smaller groups are coming soon . that is why as Kav mentioned making a bigger bet on a second B/OR R, when the first one shows up is like the "gate" as i call it to all other series.the second R, or B, after long series of singletons is a gate bet.because you simply cannot have series like RRR/BBBB/RRRRR/BBB, without have a second, or double win FIRST. BECAUSE YOU HAVE AS MANY GROUPS OF BLACK AS YOU HAVE AS REDS SERIES ALWAYS HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE "DOUBLE" GROUP IN ORDER TO GET TO ALL OTHERS.also you will never see long series, like a serie of 5 blacks,3 reds,4 blacls,ect...go lor more then 7 or 8 times without finaly go to singletons or doubletons.and looking at data it was obvious to me that ,when comparing the deviation of "groups" of 2 or more, to groups of "singles" following eachother, series BRING A MUCH MORE BALANCED GAMES THEN SINGLES.

hope that makes sens to someone, but these are actual facts that I verified or I would of not shared it.God bless.

Kav, great start to a very important topic. Rinad, has a clear term to describe his observations with " gate " , very visual.This is a clear and provable statistical topic. One of my bread and butter plays on a daily basis and can be entered at any time is what I call ....THE BOUND 2 and BEYOND. All of my data is based on a study across dozens of casinos spanning five decades, from all over the world. I have used sessions data that average 250 spins at a session. What I have found is so CONSISTANT, that you can set your watch to it. For example....For the sake of explanation, I call a " bound" event somethings that stops at a certain number of times, so...A BOUND 2 = r,r or b,b,. Using just this event, you can count on an average of 29 of these in 250 spins.Yes I have seen as few as 19, which is rare, and as many as 40, also rare, but right around 25 to 30 is where I hang my hat. MORE IMPORTANTLY, you will witness that finding a condition where they do not appear to break up anything larger than an event of 3 and larger is very, very, rare. (7) is a long sleeping event. (Average appearance is after 3 to 4 times)An example= rrrr b r bbbbb rrr b r bbb ( rr ) b r b rrrr ( bb). Here you see that four series of BEYOND 3 occurred and was then broken by a BOUND 2. I have CRAFTED my score sheets to take advantage of these events and have learned to hedge the, BOUND 2, against the BOUND 3, AND the BOUND 3 AND BEYOND.The BOUND 3 and BEYOND, puts you in all runs, and keeps you there winning, until they break.This method of play is very safe and very profitable, when combined with virtual bets for entry and a very simple DIVISOR. I can not tell you the last time it has lost. Like all methods, it takes practice and patience to get it going.I start at 10$ units, and use a very flat bet method, in series play. The entire style of this play revolves around a five hour session of 250 spins, on live dealer rapid roulette, found in just about every casino in the U.S.. I also will play it on a TALOS style inter block ORGANIX roulette machine. Any new player can start with lower stakes, say 3$ units and win an easy 40 to 50$ an hour, with very little angst.I combine this play with other methods at the same time, but that is another topic all together.I also have a method where I incorporate a single parlay, after certain events within my divisor.I should also mention that I use a " BEST OF" series style of play. This topic has made me very happy to contribute to. I look forward to reading others experience on the topic!

Guys these are some amazing posts you made here, thank you.I understand that Sputnik, Rinard, Juice and other members are using systems based on this principle, but somehow the systems are not very clear to me. I don't understand how you play.It would be great if you could give a more clear explanation of your system(s) in this or a new topic. Me and everyone else would be very interested in reading a clear description of a system based on the concept we are talking here.